Get rid of them. Hold competitions where fans can submit their details and get to do it if selected.

Makes much more sense to have someone who has a passion for the sport getting the opportunity to get that close to the cars and be a part of experience than people who are just there because they are pretty IMO.

Doing away with them would deny these young women the chance to earn a little extra money - they aren't doing this for free. If it is done in good taste, something I find rather lacking most of the time in MotoGP, then why not?

_________________Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Doing away with them would deny these young women the chance to earn a little extra money - they aren't doing this for free. If it is done in good taste, something I find rather lacking most of the time in MotoGP, then why not?

They're probably full-time models who work a lot of other jobs; missing out on a once-a-year gig won't have much effect on them, I would expect.

The flag holders may be possible to do in good taste (with less skimpy clothing, preferably) but I'm more dubious about the clapping tunnel.

I don't personally care so I voted option 3 but I wouldn't like to see them disappear just because some politically correct management type thinks it's sexist.

1. They get chose to do it, this isn't slave labour.2. They get paid and probably enjoy it3. They probably do hundreds of other modeling jobs and aren't going to go and become astrophysicists if we ban them from F1.4. Some people do like them and I can't think of a reason to actively dislike them.

I don't like this new idea that 'sexualising' anyone is sexist in itself. The word objectify really annoys me.

Humans, male and female, are programmed to find other humans sexually attractive. We all have varying ideas of what we find most attractive, but the modelling industry has certainly picked out the most commonly held views on what attractive is (even if I don't find myself sexually attracted to some of them, I can objectively say they seem like an attractive person).

There is no problem with this. I fully agree and support reducing someone to their attractiveness is the wrong thing to do. Choosing someone for a job is wrong, an attractive scientist with great ideas being reduced to "she's hot - wait, was she speaking there?" is wrong. Someone attractive being paid to stand there and be attractive is not wrong.

We're also in a world where men dress to impress women. Women dress to impress women. Broadly speaking, both men and women are more interested in opening magazines to look at women than they are men. I'm not against 'grid-men' if they want to throw that in there.

Part of the article mentions that women biologically draw themselves to sporting events to witness who is the fittest athlete, and therefore the one most desirable to mate with. It’s a common event with animals, particularly birds and mammals. Who are we to deny them of this?

People say it’s an outdated tradition that should be stopped because it justifies women, but where does it stop? Do we stop the pre-race prayer because it’s offensive to muslims, or atheists, or buddhists? How about stopping the singing of the national anthem because it causes too much national pride?

I don’t have a daughter, but if I did, and she was asked to not parade around in Lycra for promotional and biological mating purposes, I hope she would tell them to get stuffed

Part of the article mentions that women biologically draw themselves to sporting events to witness who is the fittest athlete, and therefore the one most desirable to mate with. It’s a common event with animals, particularly birds and mammals. Who are we to deny them of this?

People say it’s an outdated tradition that should be stopped because it justifies women, but where does it stop? Do we stop the pre-race prayer because it’s offensive to muslims, or atheists, or buddhists? How about stopping the singing of the national anthem because it causes too much national pride?

I don’t have a daughter, but if I did, and she was asked to not parade around in Lycra for promotional and biological mating purposes, I hope she would tell them to get stuffed

Hey bradtheboywonder.

Where's my link ole mate? Been waiting almost 2 weeks now and still it's a no show.

Nice to see though you're finally acknowledging evolution and biology , even if it is mockingly.

Dude, if you wanted it bad enough, you would have found it.Start with Googling Robert Deaner sexist and go from there. There’s a few sites and blogs from the NCAA and some American running associations

The grid girl "tradition" is dated, and yes, it is sexist. But does that automatically qualify as offensive? In some nations and with some cultures, it is. In other nations and cultures, it isn't.

But a race is a closed event, if one does not wish for themselves or others to be exposed to this, they can. It is like watching the Kardashians, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to endure such emotional distress.

Personally I do believe this tradition should be scrapped or overhauled because it does place women as second class citizens. Here are our heroes, all men, being applauded or served by obviously subservient women.

As a male it is pleasing for my eye to fall on an attractive woman. But under these circumstances my moral compass is repulsed because these women are being displayed as second class citizens. In the interests of truly promoting women out of the basement and towards full dignity and respect, this should be scrapped. It would remove some of the "sexiness" and appeal from a race, but in the interests of equality between the sexes, scrapping it is a no-brainer to me.

Estimates from the International Society of Women Airline Pilots (ISA) say there are about 4,000 women pilots worldwide, of about 130,000, that's just over three per cent. We still have a long way to go, let's not let off the gas.

keep them. dressed in some smart traditional attire i cant see the problem. dressed in hotpants and a bra is too much. leave that to wrestling etc. plus we will need something on the grid to try and stop us glancing at the halos, which could damage our eyes and you end up missing the race.

I don't personally care so I voted option 3 but I wouldn't like to see them disappear just because some politically correct management type thinks it's sexist.

1. They get chose to do it, this isn't slave labour.2. They get paid and probably enjoy it3. They probably do hundreds of other modeling jobs and aren't going to go and become astrophysicists if we ban them from F1.4. Some people do like them and I can't think of a reason to actively dislike them.

I agree with Banana Man. I don't see how banning grid girls/boys will do the society any good/bad. Making women being second class citizens or unequal to men? How exactly? How do they objectify women? They are there holding the names of the drivers and looking pretty. Nothing wrong with that, it is a paid job.

It's just a spectacle. It has nothing to do with demoting women, unless people think that it will make men superior if there's a grid girl holding Stroll's sign... Where's the outrage every time you see an underwear or perfume advertisement? They are objectifying men and women 100 times more and there are out there on a far bigger global audience.

It seems all the more that someone is being offended by something that is really not a big deal. It is really cringeworthy. I do agree about the clapping girls, that is awkward indeed.

As for Blinky's example about the pilots, you need to have a complete picture of this. Why are there less women pilots really? Are there 124,000 unemployed women pilots out there waiting to get a fair chance? Or is it maybe that women are generally more uninterested in becoming pilots? You can't take this fact (the 3% value is a fact after all if Blinky's figures are true) as a gospel that it means something without some context.

As for Blinky's example about the pilots, you need to have a complete picture of this. Why are there less women pilots really? Are there 124,000 unemployed women pilots out there waiting to get a fair chance? Or is it maybe that women are generally more uninterested in becoming pilots? You can't take this fact (the 3% value is a fact after all if Blinky's figures are true) as a gospel that it means something without some context.

I see this as key, and that's not to say that its a given that females should never want to become pilots at the same ratio as men do. Men and women have always gravitated towards certain fields in varying numbers (more female nurses, for example), how much of this is nature and how much of this is nurture? If we truly let our children be and do whatever they wanted to do, rather than forcing our own ideals of man and woman on them, would we still have this issue or would we have a more equal split?

I have no idea of the answer to that question, I would imagine we'd see a slight increase in female pilots but nowhere near a 50-50 split, but I have no data to base that on. But one thing I know, often an industry being unequal is due to no fault of the industry or the companies that operate within it.

As for Blinky's example about the pilots, you need to have a complete picture of this. Why are there less women pilots really? Are there 124,000 unemployed women pilots out there waiting to get a fair chance? Or is it maybe that women are generally more uninterested in becoming pilots? You can't take this fact (the 3% value is a fact after all if Blinky's figures are true) as a gospel that it means something without some context.

I see this as key, and that's not to say that its a given that females should never want to become pilots at the same ratio as men do. Men and women have always gravitated towards certain fields in varying numbers (more female nurses, for example), how much of this is nature and how much of this is nurture? If we truly let our children be and do whatever they wanted to do, rather than forcing our own ideals of man and woman on them, would we still have this issue or would we have a more equal split?

I have no idea of the answer to that question, I would imagine we'd see a slight increase in female pilots but nowhere near a 50-50 split, but I have no data to base that on. But one thing I know, often an industry being unequal is due to no fault of the industry or the companies that operate within it.

I agree with this. But you see, people will always try to find who's fault is it? It may well be that it's no one's fault, just that people naturally gravitate into certain fields. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that

It is like watching the Kardashians, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to endure such emotional distress.

You obviously have not met my girlfriend.

Ennis wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

As for Blinky's example about the pilots, you need to have a complete picture of this. Why are there less women pilots really? Are there 124,000 unemployed women pilots out there waiting to get a fair chance? Or is it maybe that women are generally more uninterested in becoming pilots? You can't take this fact (the 3% value is a fact after all if Blinky's figures are true) as a gospel that it means something without some context.

I see this as key, and that's not to say that its a given that females should never want to become pilots at the same ratio as men do. Men and women have always gravitated towards certain fields in varying numbers (more female nurses, for example), how much of this is nature and how much of this is nurture? If we truly let our children be and do whatever they wanted to do, rather than forcing our own ideals of man and woman on them, would we still have this issue or would we have a more equal split?

I have no idea of the answer to that question, I would imagine we'd see a slight increase in female pilots but nowhere near a 50-50 split, but I have no data to base that on. But one thing I know, often an industry being unequal is due to no fault of the industry or the companies that operate within it.

I used to be one (a pilot, not a female). It's very much a case of them being less interested although many airlines are going to painful lengths to positively discriminate in favour of women. Easyjet being one example, they will underwrite the loan of a certain number of cadets to pay for flying lessons but only if you're a female.

Want to become a pilot? Step one - attend an open day at a flying school. It's free, no qualification or aptitude are required, you just register your interest online (mainly so they know how many biscuits to buy) and go for a look around. I went to 2 open day. First one - About 20 people, 0 women. Second one, about 30-40 people, 2 women.

Get rid of them. They serve little if any purpose except to objectify some women.

Jezza13 wrote:

It's an out-dated tradition, adds nothing to the sport and just objectifies women.

Same as prostitution, which 100% objectifies women by making them a human toy to fulfill sexual urges by men. I say let's ban prostitution while we're at it as well. Also Instagram models, ban it on the same grounds.

Replace all grid girls with grid boys. Then order them to hold at every race signs with "Now only male models earn nice money for looking good and standing still in front of fast cars. Women, hopefully you are happy you are not being objectified anymore, we carry this burden now "

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

Get rid of them. Hold competitions where fans can submit their details and get to do it if selected.

Makes much more sense to have someone who has a passion for the sport getting the opportunity to get that close to the cars and be a part of experience than people who are just there because they are pretty IMO.

That's fantastic idea. I'm absolutely sure sponsors and FOM would be over the moon with someone unattractive - ugly, old, short, fat, ill or whatever - being face of their products. And this selection process totally wouldn't look like that: "choose the most good looking people, they'll have to do the job, but now we don't have to pay them "

Get rid of them. Hold competitions where fans can submit their details and get to do it if selected.

Makes much more sense to have someone who has a passion for the sport getting the opportunity to get that close to the cars and be a part of experience than people who are just there because they are pretty IMO.

That's fantastic idea. I'm absolutely sure sponsors and FOM would be over the moon with someone unattractive - ugly, old, short, fat, ill or whatever - being face of their products. And this selection process totally wouldn't look like that: "choose the most good looking people, they'll have to do the job, but now we don't have to pay them "

They’re not the faces of the products, they’re not even wearing their products. They’re just standing there holding signs up.

In my idea these people would be competition winners, simply apply online and get randomly selected, I don’t really see why sponsors or FOM would care what they look like. Most people aren’t so shallow and pathetic.

Get rid of them. They serve little if any purpose except to objectify some women.

Jezza13 wrote:

It's an out-dated tradition, adds nothing to the sport and just objectifies women.

Same as prostitution, which 100% objectifies women by making them a human toy to fulfill sexual urges by men. I say let's ban prostitution while we're at it as well. Also Instagram models, ban it on the same grounds.

Replace all grid girls with grid boys. Then order them to hold at every race signs with "Now only male models earn nice money for looking good and standing still in front of fast cars. Women, hopefully you are happy you are not being objectified anymore, we carry this burden now "

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

Get rid of them. Hold competitions where fans can submit their details and get to do it if selected.

Makes much more sense to have someone who has a passion for the sport getting the opportunity to get that close to the cars and be a part of experience than people who are just there because they are pretty IMO.

That's fantastic idea. I'm absolutely sure sponsors and FOM would be over the moon with someone unattractive - ugly, old, short, fat, ill or whatever - being face of their products. And this selection process totally wouldn't look like that: "choose the most good looking people, they'll have to do the job, but now we don't have to pay them "

I laughed with your second comment, but be fair, it is a very good idea. Remember, there's no such thing as bad publicity, so involving the crowd and giving them a chance to meet their favourite drivers would give the FOM kudos with everyone. Plus, they don't have to replace the whole grid, just one or two grid girls, on a random order.

If it’s just to hold the sign/umbrella, surely the teams can provide someone to do it? They have dozens of crew members on the grid doing final touches on the car, it wouldn’t be hard for them to just say “Hey Jerry, hold this sign up will ya?”

If it’s just to hold the sign/umbrella, surely the teams can provide someone to do it? They have dozens of crew members on the grid doing final touches on the car, it wouldn’t be hard for them to just say “Hey Jerry, hold this sign up will ya?”

They also make these wonderful little stands that will hold an umbrella up all on its own, no scantily clad female or highly skilled technician required.

If it’s just to hold the sign/umbrella, surely the teams can provide someone to do it? They have dozens of crew members on the grid doing final touches on the car, it wouldn’t be hard for them to just say “Hey Jerry, hold this sign up will ya?”

They also make these wonderful little stands that will hold an umbrella up all on its own, no scantily clad female or highly skilled technician required.

There you go, they can use those as well. I’d imagine in most teams, some minion lackey tries to impress a mate or 2 with pit passes. Use one of the mates!

Get rid of them. Hold competitions where fans can submit their details and get to do it if selected.

Makes much more sense to have someone who has a passion for the sport getting the opportunity to get that close to the cars and be a part of experience than people who are just there because they are pretty IMO.

That's fantastic idea. I'm absolutely sure sponsors and FOM would be over the moon with someone unattractive - ugly, old, short, fat, ill or whatever - being face of their products. And this selection process totally wouldn't look like that: "choose the most good looking people, they'll have to do the job, but now we don't have to pay them "

They’re not the faces of the products, they’re not even wearing their products. They’re just standing there holding signs up.

In my idea these people would be competition winners, simply apply online and get randomly selected, I don’t really see why sponsors or FOM would care what they look like. Most people aren’t so shallow and pathetic.

It matters a lot to sponsors. Sex sells. The next time you see some TV ads, just do a little poll and check how many of those people in the ads are more physically appealing than average.

On reflection, I don't see that grid girls are any different to any other kind of PR modelling. Like I said before, I don't feel particularly strongly about it either way, but don't really agree that it's degrading or demeaning to women.

Still feel uncomfortable about the clapping parade the drivers walk through, though. Seems a little subservient to me

How about grid kids? Pick some local racing kids and/or fans, let them in the middle of the spectacle for a few hours and enjoy it.

I was thinking this too. It's always a nice touch at the start of soccer matches. But then it got me thinking about all the activity that happens on the grid - mechanics working away, reporters running around, stacks of tyres pushed around on trollies - putting 20 kids there might not be such a good idea

Who cares? The girls aren't forced to do it, I suspect most, if not all, of them are excited about the opportunity to be seen and paid for it. Whether a professional model, corporate representative, of local area race fan... why deny them the opportunity. That said, I would agree that some of the costumes could be in better taste, but that is just a personal opinion.

Who cares? The girls aren't forced to do it, I suspect most, if not all, of them are excited about the opportunity to be seen and paid for it. Whether a professional model, corporate representative, of local area race fan... why deny them the opportunity. That said, I would agree that some of the costumes could be in better taste, but that is just a personal opinion.

I was about to ask if anyone had reason to believe any girl had been forced to take part who was not comfortable with it. It is not something they are forced into it is something they strive to achieve.

Is it degrading? FAR far less degrading than being on many TV shows and soaps.